Protocol for a systematic review on the extent of non-publication of research studies and associated study characteristics.

BACKGROUND: Methodological research has found that non-published studies often have different results than those that are published, a phenomenon known as publication bias. When results are not published, or are published selectively based on the direction or the strength of the findings, healthcare professionals and consumers of healthcare cannot base their decision-making on the full body of current evidence. METHODS: As part of the OPEN project (http://www.open-project.eu) we will conduct a systematic review with the following objectives:1. To determine the proportion and/or rate of non-publication of studies by systematically reviewing methodological research projects that followed up a cohort of studies that a. received research ethics committee (REC) approval,b. were registered in trial registries, orc. were presented as abstracts at conferences.2. To assess the association of study characteristics (for example, direction and/or strength of findings) with likelihood of full publication.To identify reports of relevant methodological research projects we will conduct electronic database searches, check reference lists, and contact experts. Published and unpublished projects will be included. The inclusion criteria are as follows:a. RECs: methodological research projects that examined the subsequent proportion and/or rate of publication of studies that received approval from RECs;b. Trial registries: methodological research projects that examine the subsequent proportion and/or rate of publication of studies registered in trial registries;c. Conference abstracts: methodological research projects that examine the subsequent proportion and/or rate of full publication of studies which were initially presented at conferences as abstracts.Primary outcomes: Proportion/rate of published studies; time to full publication (mean/median; cumulative publication rate by time).Secondary outcomes: Association of study characteristics with full publication.The different questions (a, b, and c) will be investigated separately. Data synthesis will involve a combination of descriptive and statistical summaries of the included methodological research projects. DISCUSSION: Results are expected to be publicly available in mid 2013.

A protocol for a systematic review on the impact of unpublished studies and studies published in the gray literature in meta-analyses.

BACKGROUND: Meta-analyses are particularly vulnerable to the effects of publication bias. Despite methodologists' best efforts to locate all evidence for a given topic the most comprehensive searches are likely to miss unpublished studies and studies that are published in the gray literature only. If the results of the missing studies differ systematically from the published ones, a meta-analysis will be biased with an inaccurate assessment of the intervention's effects.As part of the OPEN project (http://www.open-project.eu) we will conduct a systematic review with the following objectives:â-ª To assess the impact of studies that are not published or published in the gray literature on pooled effect estimates in meta-analyses (quantitative measure).â-ª To assess whether the inclusion of unpublished studies or studies published in the gray literature leads to different conclusions in meta-analyses (qualitative measure). METHODS/DESIGN: Inclusion criteria: Methodological research projects of a cohort of meta-analyses which compare the effect of the inclusion or exclusion of unpublished studies or studies published in the gray literature.Literature search: To identify relevant research projects we will conduct electronic searches in Medline, Embase and The Cochrane Library; check reference lists; and contact experts.Outcomes: 1) The extent to which the effect estimate in a meta-analyses changes with the inclusion or exclusion of studies that were not published or published in the gray literature; and 2) the extent to which the inclusion of unpublished studies impacts the meta-analyses' conclusions.Data collection: Information will be collected on the area of health care; the number of meta-analyses included in the methodological research project; the number of studies included in the meta-analyses; the number of study participants; the number and type of unpublished studies; studies published in the gray literature and published studies; the sources used to retrieve studies that are unpublished, published in the gray literature, or commercially published; and the validity of the methodological research project.Data synthesis: Data synthesis will involve descriptive and statistical summaries of the findings of the included methodological research projects. DISCUSSION: Results are expected to be publicly available in the middle of 2013.

Publication bias in animal research: a systematic review protocol.

BACKGROUND: Systematic reviews and meta-analyses of pre-clinical studies, in vivo animal experiments in particular, can influence clinical care. Publication bias is one of the major threats of validity in systematic reviews and meta-analyses. Previous empirical studies suggested that systematic reviews and meta-analyses have become more prevalent until 2010 and found evidence for compromised methodological rigor with a trend towards improvement. We aim to comprehensively summarize and update the evidence base on systematic reviews and meta-analyses of animal studies, their methodological quality and assessment of publication bias in particular. METHODS/DESIGN: The objectives of this systematic review are as follows: âeuro¢To investigate the epidemiology of published systematic reviews of animal studies until present. âeuro¢To examine methodological features of systematic reviews and meta-analyses of animal studies with special attention to the assessment of publication bias. âeuro¢To investigate the influence of systematic reviews of animal studies on clinical research by examining citations of the systematic reviews by clinical studies. Eligible studies for this systematic review constitute systematic reviews and meta-analyses that summarize in vivo animal experiments with the purpose of reviewing animal evidence to inform human health. We will exclude genome-wide association studies and animal experiments with the main purpose to learn more about fundamental biology, physical functioning or behavior. In addition to the inclusion of systematic reviews and meta-analyses identified by other empirical studies, we will systematically search Ovid Medline, Embase, ToxNet, and ScienceDirect from 2009 to January 2013 for further eligible studies without language restrictions. Two reviewers working independently will assess titles, abstracts, and full texts for eligibility and extract relevant data from included studies. Data reporting will involve a descriptive summary of meta-analyses and systematic reviews. DISCUSSION: Results are expected to be publicly available later in 2013 and may form the basis for recommendations to improve the quality of systematic reviews and meta-analyses of animal studies and their use with respect to clinical care.

Prise de poids et contraceptifs à progestatifs seuls: plus d'inquiétude que de preuves scientifiques. [Weight gain and progestin-only contraceptives: more concern than evidence].

Weight gain is a side effect often associated with progestin-only contraceptives. A recently published Cochrane review focuses on this issue that has been addressed in only few studies of good quality. Here we discuss the results of this review in the context of three clinical cases. With progestin-only contraceptives the weight gain is less than often thought, especially after six or twelve months of treatment. Some results are rather reassuring, especially those in obese women and during the post-partum period. This should help improve the compliance of women who fear gaining weight with this type of hormonal contraception.

Social inequalities of functioning and perceived health in Switzerland: a representative cross-sectional analysis.

Many people worldwide live with a disability, i.e. limitations in functioning. The prevalence is expected to increase due to demographic change and the growing importance of non-communicable disease and injury. To date, many epidemiological studies have used simple dichotomous measures of disability, even though the WHO's International Classification of Functioning, Disability, and Health (ICF) provides a multi-dimensional framework of functioning. We aimed to examine associations of socio-economic status (SES) and social integration in 3 core domains of functioning (impairment, pain, limitations in activity and participation) and perceived health. We conducted a secondary analysis of representative cross-sectional data of the Swiss Health Survey 2007 including 10,336 female and 8,424 male Swiss residents aged 15 or more. Guided by a theoretical ICF-based model, 4 mixed effects Poisson regressions were fitted in order to explain functioning and perceived health by indicators of SES and social integration. Analyses were stratified by age groups (15-30, 31-54, ≥55 years). In all age groups, SES and social integration were significantly associated with functional and perceived health. Among the functional domains, impairment and pain were closely related, and both were associated with limitations in activity and participation. SES, social integration and functioning were related to perceived health. We found pronounced social inequalities in functioning and perceived health, supporting our theoretical model. Social factors play a significant role in the experience of health, even in a wealthy country such as Switzerland. These findings await confirmation in other, particularly lower resourced settings.

Detecting, quantifying and adjusting for publication bias in meta-analyses: protocol of a systematic review on methods.

BACKGROUND: Health professionals and policymakers aspire to make healthcare decisions based on the entire relevant research evidence. This, however, can rarely be achieved because a considerable amount of research findings are not published, especially in case of 'negative' results - a phenomenon widely recognized as publication bias. Different methods of detecting, quantifying and adjusting for publication bias in meta-analyses have been described in the literature, such as graphical approaches and formal statistical tests to detect publication bias, and statistical approaches to modify effect sizes to adjust a pooled estimate when the presence of publication bias is suspected. An up-to-date systematic review of the existing methods is lacking. METHODS/DESIGN: The objectives of this systematic review are as follows:âeuro¢ To systematically review methodological articles which focus on non-publication of studies and to describe methods of detecting and/or quantifying and/or adjusting for publication bias in meta-analyses.âeuro¢ To appraise strengths and weaknesses of methods, the resources they require, and the conditions under which the method could be used, based on findings of included studies.We will systematically search Web of Science, Medline, and the Cochrane Library for methodological articles that describe at least one method of detecting and/or quantifying and/or adjusting for publication bias in meta-analyses. A dedicated data extraction form is developed and pilot-tested. Working in teams of two, we will independently extract relevant information from each eligible article. As this will be a qualitative systematic review, data reporting will involve a descriptive summary. DISCUSSION: Results are expected to be publicly available in mid 2013. This systematic review together with the results of other systematic reviews of the OPEN project (To Overcome Failure to Publish Negative Findings) will serve as a basis for the development of future policies and guidelines regarding the assessment and handling of publication bias in meta-analyses.

Defining publication bias: protocol for a systematic review of highly cited articles and proposal for a new framework.

BACKGROUND: Selective publication of studies, which is commonly called publication bias, is widely recognized. Over the years a new nomenclature for other types of bias related to non-publication or distortion related to the dissemination of research findings has been developed. However, several of these different biases are often still summarized by the term 'publication bias'. METHODS/DESIGN: As part of the OPEN Project (To Overcome failure to Publish nEgative fiNdings) we will conduct a systematic review with the following objectives:- To systematically review highly cited articles that focus on non-publication of studies and to present the various definitions of biases related to the dissemination of research findings contained in the articles identified.- To develop and discuss a new framework on nomenclature of various aspects of distortion in the dissemination process that leads to public availability of research findings in an international group of experts in the context of the OPEN Project.We will systematically search Web of Knowledge for highly cited articles that provide a definition of biases related to the dissemination of research findings. A specifically designed data extraction form will be developed and pilot-tested. Working in teams of two, we will independently extract relevant information from each eligible article.For the development of a new framework we will construct an initial table listing different levels and different hazards en route to making research findings public. An international group of experts will iteratively review the table and reflect on its content until no new insights emerge and consensus has been reached. DISCUSSION: Results are expected to be publicly available in mid-2013. This systematic review together with the results of other systematic reviews of the OPEN project will serve as a basis for the development of future policies and guidelines regarding the assessment and prevention of publication bias.

Ist die «Polypille» in der kardiovaskulären Prävention eine Option [Is the "polypill" in cardiovascular prevention an option]

Fallvignette: Ein 58-jähriger Mann hatte vor einem Jahr einen Herzinfarkt, der mit einem beschichteten Stent versorgt wurde. Im Beruf hat er eine verantwortungsvolle Position und ist häufig geschäftlich unterwegs. Er gibt an, dass er Mühe mit der Einnahme seiner fünf Medikamente (Statin, β-Blocker, ACE-Hemmer, Clopidogrel, Acetylsalizylsäure) hat und dass er ab und zu vergisst, eines zu nehmen. Frage: Könnte ihm ein Kombinationspräparat (Polypille) helfen, seine Medikamente regelmässig einzunehmen? Hintergrund: Weltweit sind Herz-Kreislauf-Erkrankungen die führende Ursache für Tod und Behinderung. Um diese Krankheitslast zu vermindern, ist eine bevölkerungsbezogene Prävention entscheidend, bei der bekannte kardiovaskuläre Risikofaktoren kontrolliert werden. Das Konzept der Polypille mit einer fixen Kombination von mindestens einem Antihypertensivum und einem Statin wurde vor allem in Hinblick auf Entwicklungs- und Schwellenländer entwickelt. Die Primärprävention ist in diesen Ländern schwierig durch führbar; eine einzige Tablette wäre dort eine kostengünstige Variante. Aber auch in reichen Ländern könnte die Polypille sinnvoll sein, um z.B. die Compliance bei multimorbiden Patienten zu verbessern. Als Polypille werden verschiedene Kombinationen von Medikamenten angeboten, ihre Wirksamkeit und möglichen Nebenwirkungen sind jedoch unklar. Ziel dieses Reviews war, ihre Wirksamkeit in der primären und sekundären Prävention bezüglich Mortalität, nicht-tödliche kardiovaskuläre Ereignisse und Blutdruck-bzw. Lipidsenkung zu überprüfen.

The REporting of Studies Conducted Using Observational Routinely-Collected Health Data (RECORD) Statement: Methods for Arriving at Consensus and Developing Reporting Guidelines.

OBJECTIVE: Routinely collected health data, collected for administrative and clinical purposes, without specific a priori research questions, are increasingly used for observational, comparative effectiveness, health services research, and clinical trials. The rapid evolution and availability of routinely collected data for research has brought to light specific issues not addressed by existing reporting guidelines. The aim of the present project was to determine the priorities of stakeholders in order to guide the development of the REporting of studies Conducted using Observational Routinely-collected health Data (RECORD) statement. METHODS: Two modified electronic Delphi surveys were sent to stakeholders. The first determined themes deemed important to include in the RECORD statement, and was analyzed using qualitative methods. The second determined quantitative prioritization of the themes based on categorization of manuscript headings. The surveys were followed by a meeting of RECORD working committee, and re-engagement with stakeholders via an online commentary period. RESULTS: The qualitative survey (76 responses of 123 surveys sent) generated 10 overarching themes and 13 themes derived from existing STROBE categories. Highest-rated overall items for inclusion were: Disease/exposure identification algorithms; Characteristics of the population included in databases; and Characteristics of the data. In the quantitative survey (71 responses of 135 sent), the importance assigned to each of the compiled themes varied depending on the manuscript section to which they were assigned. Following the working committee meeting, online ranking by stakeholders provided feedback and resulted in revision of the final checklist. CONCLUSIONS: The RECORD statement incorporated the suggestions provided by a large, diverse group of stakeholders to create a reporting checklist specific to observational research using routinely collected health data. Our findings point to unique aspects of studies conducted with routinely collected health data and the perceived need for better reporting of methodological issues.

Was bringt die Masern-Passivimpfung nach Exposition? [What is the value of measles passive vaccination after exposure?].

In der Schweiz, wie in vielen anderen Ländern, ist die Durchimpfungsrate zu tief, um die Verbreitung von Masern zu stoppen. Es kommt immer wieder zu Masern-Ausbrüchen. Die Gabe von Immunglobulinen (Passivimpfung) ist für nicht-immune Personen gedacht, die Kontakt zu Masernvirus-Ausscheidern hatten. Sie wird in der Schweiz für Hochrisiko-Personen wie z.B. schwangere Frauen, immunsupprimierte Personen und Säuglinge <6 Monate ohne nachgewiesene Immunität empfohlen. Schätzungen über die Wirksamkeit der Passivimpfung variieren; es wurde keine minimalwirksame Dosierung festgelegt. Ziel dieses Reviews war, die Wirksamkeit und Sicherheit einer intramuskulären oder intravenösen Gabe von Immunglobulinen zur Masern-Prophylaxe nach Exposition jedoch vor Symptombeginn bei für Masern empfänglichen Personen zu untersuchen.

Phimose : Sind topische Kortikosteroide eine Alternative zur chirurgischen Behandlung [Phimosis : are topical corticosteroids an alternative to surgical treatment?]

Hintergrund: Die physiologische Phimose ist bereits bei der Geburt vorhanden und wächst sich in den meisten Fällen aus. Während 10% der Knaben im Alter von drei Jahren noch eine Phimose haben, nimmt diese Prävalenz auf 6-8% im Alter von sieben Jahren und 1% im Alter von 16 Jahren ab. Man spricht von einer pathologischen Phimose, wenn die Vorhaut Vernarbungen infolge von wiederholten Entzündungen oder forcierten Retraktionsversuchen aufweist. Dennoch ist die Unterscheidung zwischen pathologischer und physiologischer Phimose schwierig, und eine chirurgische Behandlung (Zirkumzision, Vorhautplastik) ist häufig. Eine topische Kortikosteroidbehandlung wird seit mehreren Jahren wegen seiner anti-inflammatorischen und immunsuppressiven Wirkung (Verminderung der Kollagenproduktion) angewendet. Es gibt aber keine Evidenz bezüglich Wirksamkeit und Sicherheit dieser Behandlung.

Thrombose veineuse profonde : une thrombolyse est-elle efficace ? : revue cochrane pour le praticien

Scénario: Une patiente de 45 ans vous consulte car sa jambe droite est bleue, cyanosée, avec une tension dans le mollet depuis cinq jours, qui s'est étendue progressivement jusqu'au haut de la cuisse. La circonférence du mollet droit est 4 cm plus grande que celle du mollet gauche. La patiente est en surpoids (IMC à 35 kg/m2) et suit depuis quelques années un traitement oestro-progestatif. Elle n'a pas d'anamnèse familiale ou d'antécédent de maladie thromboembolique. Un ultrason montre une thrombose veineuse profonde (TVP) avec un thrombus s'étendant de la veine poplitée à la veine iliaque externe. Question: La patiente pourrait-elle bénéficier d'une thrombolyse? Contexte: Les complications de la TVP comprennent l'embolie pulmonaire et le syndrome post-thrombotique. Un syndrome post-thrombotique léger à modéré peut survenir chez 30-50% des patients malgré un traitement anticoagulant, qui prévient principalement l'embolie pulmonaire et la récidive de TVP. Cette mise à jour de revue systématique compare l'efficacité du traitement anticoagulant à celui combinant les anticoagulants et la thrombolyse (par streptokinase, urokinase ou activateur tissulaire du plasminogène).

Einsatz nicht-steroidaler Antirheumatika bei akuter Gicht [Use of non-steroidal antirheumatic drugs in acute gout]

Hintergrund : Ein akuter Gichtanfall entsteht durchdas Ausfällen von Mononatriumkristallenaus der Synovialflüssigkeit unddie dadurch bedingte Entzündung einesoder mehrerer Gelenke.Mitunter kommt es auch zur Bildung der Kristalle direkt im Gewebe. Das Erscheinungsbild der Gichterkrankung umfasst neben akuten Gichtanfällen die asymptomatische Hyperurikämie und chronische Gicht-Arthritis; extraartikulär kann sich eine Uratnephropathie bzw. Urolithiasis ausbilden. Bei akuten Gichtanfällen kommen die klassischen NSAR (z.B. Diclofenac) sowie die selektiven Cyclooxygenase-2-Hemmer (COX-2-Hemmer oder Coxibe) zum Einsatz. Beide Substanzgruppen scheinen das gleiche Risikoprofil und klinische Effektivität zu besitzen. Der Einsatz sollte kurzzeitig in maximal möglicher Dosierung erfolgen. Bei komorbiden Patienten z.B. mit kardiovaskulären Erkrankungen, Niereninsuffizienz, Status nach gastrointestinalem Ulkus oder Blutung ist der Einsatz von NSAR eingeschränkt. Bisher wurde der Nutzen und die Sicherheit von klassischen NSAR und COX-2-Hemmer in der Behandlung von akuten Gichtanfällen nicht systematisch untersucht.

Completion and Publication Rates of Randomized Controlled Trials in Surgery: An Empirical Study.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the prevalence of discontinuation and nonpublication of surgical versus medical randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and to explore risk factors for discontinuation and nonpublication of surgical RCTs. BACKGROUND: Trial discontinuation has significant scientific, ethical, and economic implications. To date, the prevalence of discontinuation of surgical RCTs is unknown. METHODS: All RCT protocols approved between 2000 and 2003 by 6 ethics committees in Canada, Germany, and Switzerland were screened. Baseline characteristics were collected and, if published, full reports retrieved. Risk factors for early discontinuation for slow recruitment and nonpublication were explored using multivariable logistic regression analyses. RESULTS: In total, 863 RCT protocols involving adult patients were identified, 127 in surgery (15%) and 736 in medicine (85%). Surgical trials were discontinued for any reason more often than medical trials [43% vs 27%, risk difference 16% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 5%-26%); P = 0.001] and more often discontinued for slow recruitment [18% vs 11%, risk difference 8% (95% CI: 0.1%-16%); P = 0.020]. The percentage of trials not published as full journal article was similar in surgical and medical trials (44% vs 40%, risk difference 4% (95% CI: -5% to 14%); P = 0.373). Discontinuation of surgical trials was a strong risk factor for nonpublication (odds ratio = 4.18, 95% CI: 1.45-12.06; P = 0.008). CONCLUSIONS: Discontinuation and nonpublication rates were substantial in surgical RCTs and trial discontinuation was strongly associated with nonpublication. These findings need to be taken into account when interpreting surgical literature. Surgical trialists should consider feasibility studies before embarking on full-scale trials.